Where Islam spreads, freedom dies

Holm Putzke, the German legal professor whose work formed the basis of the Cologne court's decision to ban circumcision as unlawful violence against the person, has been receiving threats since the judgement was rendered.

In an interview with a Passau newspaper, he said he had received insults "going beyond good taste" and threats "some of which were far into the criminally actionable range". nn

What kind of threats it is that he has received by telephone, email or internet in the last few days, Putzke did not want to say out of fear of copycats. "I would be lying if I said it had made no impact on me," the professor concedes, "but I am not going to let myself be affected by it. It's about the arguments." But those sending the threats do not seem receptive to those.

However, a clear survey conducted on behalf of the magazine found that a majority of Germans (56 percent) support the ruling, with just 35 percent opposing it. German child protection organisations are among those supporting the court's decision.

Muslims don't seem too pleased though:

Meanwhile, junior partners in Merkel's ruling coalition government the FDP are pushing for a law to clarify that circumcision remains legal in Germany, FDP integration expert Serkan Tören told the Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung newspaper on Saturday.

"If Germany bans circumcision on religious grounds the nation shouldn't bother with any further integration policies," said Tören, who himself is a Muslim. "A ban on circumcision would be the clearest signal to the Muslims in our country that they aren't part of Germany, that they aren't even welcome."

In Britain Gallery, I briefly discuss immigration to the UK, this alarming juggernaut which is crushing Britain.

England is now, due to immigration, the sixth most densely populated nation in the world, and 13% of people living in England were born outside the UK.

The UK, like so many other Western European countries, has fallen victim to what is called "the tragedy of the commons".

The tragedy of the commons is the reason why, for example, streets are always much dirtier than house floors, and why people behave in and treat public places in ways that they would not dream of repeating at home, like throwing litter on the pavement (the street's "floor").

This is also why green spaces and natural habitats are generally better protected when they have a private owner than when they are "common".

The tragedy of the commons is that, if something belongs to everybody, nobody cares too much about it and looks after it properly because nobody feels that that something is his or hers, really.

The UK's mass, unrestricted immigration has many different causes - and bad policies by politicians who have not taken care of the interests of their people are obviously the main culprit - but it has been made possible by the tragedy of the commons too: considering one's country differently from one's home.

Invading someone else's country is not dissimilar to invading someone else's home.

The parents of a girl said to have been groomed and sold for sex to restaurant workers told a court yesterday how they fought a vain battle for three years for action against her abusers.

They described how the shy, happy 13-year-old became a girl so troubled that they sought help from her school, the NHS, police and social services.

A jury at Stafford Crown Court heard that the men accused of sexually exploiting the girl were not arrested until December 2009, three years after her parents raised concerns.

The girl was said to have been given a diet of alcohol and drugs by men who regarded her as “a commodity” to be sold to staff in takeaway food outlets in Telford, Shropshire. She is one of four girls allegedly targeted by two brothers, Ahdel Ali and Mubarek Ali.

The court was told that the girl fell into bad company after the family returned from a British military base overseas, and by 14 was drinking, smoking cannabis and staying out overnight. Her mother said that she and her husband “went to all sorts of agencies, trying to get help”.

They confiscated their daughter’s mobile and began following her and noting the registration numbers of cars she got into.

She was horrified when her daughter became pregnant at 16. The girl wrote down the names of five possible fathers, including both Ali brothers.

Ahdel Ali denies rape, 11 counts of sexual activity with a child and various charges of controlling child prostitution. His brother denies four counts of controlling child prostitution, two of trafficking a child and one charge of causing child prostitution.
The case continues.

Member of the "Free Syrian Army" with stolen priest's garment and cross, Homs

A few months ago, in a blog post, I wondered whether the Syrian jihadist rebels were taking advantaging of the chaos the country is in to destroy symbols of the country's Christian heritage, like the famous crusader castle of Krak des Chevaliers. As these images of plundered churches show, it is now clear that they have gone much further than that.

Plundered church in Bustan Al-Diwan, Homs old town

Church in Um Al Zinar, now roofless thanks to the Syrian rebels

Why are our governments continuing to agitate for action against the Syrian government when it is overwhelmingly clear that the toppling of the Assad regime will produce the same result as Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, etc., in other words jihadistscoming to power? Perhaps you could excuse some of their naivety initially. But when they learn no lessons from their mistakes, you have to ask: what is going on? Are they really so spectacularly naive or do they have some other agenda? The history of the 20th century is chock-full of episodes in which conniving western governments thought they could exploit jihadists for their own ends, only to discover the jihadists weren't quite as amenable as their foolish western backers had hoped.

There's some refreshingly rare truth-telling in this comment piece from The Times. She loses points for a facile condemnation of the English Defence League.

The feudal societies imported from Pakistan and Bangladesh throw up problems that no one wants to address

A week on, I am still digesting Ed Miliband’s apology for his party’s woeful underestimate of both the scale of immigration and public concern about it. Mr Miliband said that Labour had let too many immigrants from Eastern Europe into the country too quickly by lifting controls on the new EU member states before others did.
But Labour wasn’t just “insufficiently alive to the burdens” of ordinary people, as he claimed. It actively smeared many who voiced concerns. James Cameron, the envoy to Romania, and Steve Moxon, the civil servant who revealed that the Home Office was rubber-stamping bogus visa applications in 2004, were branded as racists. When Frank Field set up the Cross-Party Group on Balanced Migration in 2008, colleagues openly called him a racist. This column could be filled with the names of people who tried to express reasonable concerns — including social workers and policemen at the sharp end — and were silenced.

This censorship was aided by the misuse of statistics. When Westminster City Council and others asked for more money to run services because so many more people were registering with GPs and schools, the Government flatly denied the claims. When the campaign group Migration Watch predicted in 2002 that net immigration would reach two million over the coming decade (which has turned out to be an underestimate), it was attacked as “muddled”, “duplicitous” and worse.

The Home Office stuck to its notorious estimate that only 13,000 Eastern Europeans would move to Britain after EU enlargement, though more than a million had arrived by the end of 2009. When Labour left office, it was still basing its estimates of movements on the ONS Passenger Survey, a survey at ports and airports that is entirely voluntary. A government that wanted the truth would have done what the coalition is now doing: gathering data from councils and GPs and laboriously restoring border controls.

If Mr Miliband’s remarks are to usher in a new era of glasnost, he must recognise that the truth has been further hindered by the preference by all parties for couching immigration in terms of Eastern Europeans: a tradition he continued last week. The public is given the impression that nothing can be done because most people come here from the EU. But in fact the EU accounts for less than a quarter of the 3.5 million long-term immigrants who the Office for National Statistics says have come to the UK since 1997.

The focus on white Europeans also keeps issues about cultural differences at bay. For years the Labour MP Ann Cryer was simply ignored when she raised concerns about forced marriages and honour crimes. When I wrote in 2003 that some women in England were living in similar conditions to those I had witnessed as an aid worker in Bangladesh, but were further isolated by language, the Muslim Council of Britain put me on its watch list. Three years later the Blair Government dropped plans to ban forced marriage because the Muslim Council warned that doing so would “stigmatise communities”. These issues were to be hidden from public view: and damn the victims.
Brave campaigning by women such as Jasvinder Sanghera has helped to change this. But fear of offending racial sensibilities still makes the political class look away from one particular group of immigrants, from parts of Bangladesh and Pakistan — particularly Sylhet and Mirpur — which remains almost wholly segregated. In many of the places where people from these two regions come to live, more than 60 per cent would have to move house to achieve an even spread across their district. This is a very high score on what social scientists call the “index of dissimilarity”.

I have visited a British school where all the boys came from Mirpur, and the parents listened to the imam not the (white) headteacher. I have met health workers who are still struggling to persuade male relatives to let mothers attend clinics. I have met doctors who are seriously worried by the high incidence of birth defects among the Pakistani community in England, which they put down to the frequency of marriage between first cousins.

We have imported feudal societies into our midst but ignored the people trapped inside them. Fewer than one in four women from these communities have jobs. Many still do not speak English. Immigrants who cannot get jobs, or work only in one sector, will not integrate. Immigrants who cannot communicate will not integrate. The more relatives arrive, the larger these ghettos will become and the harder it will be to tear down the walls.

For the past eight years, polls have suggested that British alarm over immigration focuses on the sheer scale of the numbers; but there is also a feeling of unfairness about those who do not work, or do not integrate, but use public services. Polls by YouGov for Prospect magazine last month suggest that the tone of opinion is hardening: 54 per cent of those surveyed said that “all further immigration should be halted”; and 53 per cent said the worst thing about the UK was “the number of immigrants”, ahead of welfare scroungers and crime. These people cannot all be crazed members of the English Defence League.

In the Westminster village, people are getting het up about the possibility that top universities may be refused a visa for a top scientist (a problem which can surely be fixed). Outside the bubble, people worry about chain migration. They see extra doors appearing in semis in Hendon and elsewhere, hiding desperate people who are bunking up ten to a room. They want the Government to distinguish between hard-working foreigners and people who have little hope of making an economic contribution because they are illiterate in their own language.

Mr Miliband was right to call for more stringent enforcement of the minimum wage and laws against businesses employing illegal workers. But if he would talk about the disenfranchised people we have neither embraced nor rejected; if he would support the coalition’s efforts to tighten the rules; if he would stop implying that there is actually very little we can do; that would make his apology easier to swallow.

The Moroccan minister for Moroccans Living Abroad, Abdellatif Mâazouz, is pressing governments in Europe to make the teaching of Arabic a standard part of the European school curriculum.

For several months he and his governement have been undertaking a veritable cultural offensive to impose the Arabic language in the educational curricula of European countries, alongside English, French, Spanish, Portuguese and/or Mandarin.

"A special effort is made on the cultural level and on the level of language teaching..." explains the minister. His activism is starting to bear fruit, as he insists the "voice [of the Moroccan government] is starting to be heard, especially in France, which will soon announce something in this vein," even going on to enlarge his listening audience to "the EU too".

...The objective is that young people of the 2nd, 3rd and 4th generations remain attached to Morocco not only in their thoughts and hearts, but through culture," explains the minister.

...For the idea of teaching Arabic as a foreign language to hit the target, the strategy of the minister is simple:"We sell the idea that there are almost 4 million Moroccans living in Europe, 600 million Arabic-speakers across the world, and that Europeans and others must know this language, even if only to get to know some of their citizens better," he argues.

The Moroccan diplomat's communication tactic is effective since, based on the figures, and highlighting the mutual interests of the Arab and European countries, it reinforces the legitimacy of the demand that Arabic be included in the European educational curricula. It also justifies sending regular contingents of teachers of Arabic and Moroccan culture to Europe, especially France.

...that I feel like an African and am almost tempted to convert to Islam. I understand what Churchill meant when he wrote "Mohammedanism ... appears to possess a strange fascination for negroid races." It's so hot you can hardly move or work. Suddenly, I grasp the bizarre spirit of lethargy that seems to afflict all Mahometans. This is a hot climate religion that grants a special religious sanction to dossing around all day - "praying" - instead of working. I miss the rain of Scotland...

On Saturday the Danish nationalist group Vederfølner held its annual summer party and football cup in Aarhus. It was a great success and ended with a feast of roast suckling pig. (Good to know pork is still being eaten somewhere in Europe!)

Some Antifa zombies came on an expedition to try and disrupt the gathering. Unfortunately, they didn't know their way around the area. So, like total fools, they stumbled around blindly till they found a building they knew had been used for Vederfølner gatherings in the past. Hearing the sound of festivities inside, they assumed they'd found their target and commenced their attack. The results can be seen in the photographs. Unfortunately, these clowns had picked the wrong building and were attacking an innocent family gathering, probably a wedding.

It was only a few days ago I was posting about the Mohammedan-infested Spanish exclaves of Ceuta and Melilla, predicting they will be the site of Kosovo-like insurgencies within a few decades. Maybe I got the timescale wrong.

Two Islamists ‘capable of terrorist attacks of special brutality’, have been arrested in Spain’s North African enclave of Melilla.

The two are Spanish and aged 25 and 30, have been named as Nabil Mohamed Chaib and Rachid Abdelah Mohamed, and are accused of torturing and killing two companions who had distanced themselves from the orthodox religion imposed in the group.

The cell contains a majority of Spanish residents of Maghreb origin who are based in Melilla, and Moroccan residents based in Farhana, Morocco.

The group recruits and indoctrinates youngsters and then sends them to training camps.

The Minister of the Interior, Jorge Fernández Díaz, said the two arrested were especially dangerous and now what needed to be done was to establish the reach of the group. The National Police have been questioning the parents of the two, who will be transferred to Madrid this, Wednesday, afternoon.

The operation be being directed by Judge Eloy Velasco in Instruction Court 6 of the National Court.

Muslim marriages are causing problems across Europe. Third-worlders, it seems, feel the need to celebrate weddings in ways most civilised Europeans would consider outrageous. For example, it is common for Muslims to drive around in large vehicle convoys, beeping their horns, hanging out of the doors, disregarding all the rules of the road, while shouting at passersby. There was even one case where gunfire was reported (not this one). I have seen reports like this from various countries in Europe, but it seems to be especially prevalent in France.

This one ended with the deployment of a major police battalion and the use of tear gas after a couple of policemen initially tried to book the Muslims (Algerians) for traffic violations and the Muslims resisted their authority.

The incident occurred in Nancy, France.

Brussels police have decided to crack down on the same problem. From now on, all marriages will be subject to special police attention in Brussels. Again, this may be a sign that either the police themselves or the politicians have decided to get a bit tougher on the Muslims there. Rather late in the day for that, I'm afraid.

The historian Egon Flaig, a professor at the University of Rostock, has an article in the German newsmagazine Focus. In it, he takes issue with the claim that Islam is a part of Europe's history. This claim is being made by many Muslim organisations for political reasons, he points out, and does not correspond to historical truth.

Just as National Socialism divided human beings into the master race and sub-humans on a racist basis, Sharia, too, has created a system of religious Apartheid. In addition, Sharia demands that this system be extended over the world. We should have no hesitation in referring to Sharia Islam as Islamofascism, currently the most dangerous form of right-wing extremism.

We've grown used to newspapers covering up the Muslim/immigrant background of the perpetrators of crimes. Usually, the sin is one of omission, though. Judging by this story in Le Monde, we may now have moved into a new phase of "commission".

The story relates to an incident at a French school last week in which a 13-year-old boy was murdered by a 16-year-old Muslim Chechen who attended the same school, apparently because he refused to lower his eyes when they came across one another.

The Muslim's name was Souleymane. When reporting the story, though, Le Monde bizarrely changed the murderer's name to Vladimir, conveniently covering up the fact that he is a Muslim. It also mis-reported the Muslims demand for submissive lowering of the eyes by saying simply that the incident blew up "when their eyes met".

It has been confirmed that pork has been removed from the menu at the Lichtenrade youth prison in Berlin. A Socialist politician visited the prison recently, heard complaints about the menu and has since raised a fuss about it. Although he is a Turk by the sound of his name, Erol Özcaraca, on this occasion he has taken the side of the "infidels".

In my opinion it is not right. The rights of the young people are being restricted. I would also feel discriminated against.

A spokeswoman for the justice administration explained:

70 per cent of those arrested there have an immigrant background. They cannot eat pork for religious reasons.

El País had an article yesterday about "Spanish" Muslims who had been killed fighting against the Assad government in Syria. The Muslims were from Ceuta, a Spanish exclave in Africa, adjacent to Moroccan territory and inhabited by large numbers of ethnic Moroccan Muslims who are outbreeding the Europeans resident there. For more on Ceuta and Melilla, the Spanish exclaves in Africa, see here.

The article recounts the story of some Muslims from Ceuta who travelled to Syria and got killed there. (Nice one, Assad!) It's full of the usual stuff from family and acquaintances about how he "seemed so normal, he wasn't a fanatic". They came from the neighbourhood of El Príncipe, next to the Moroccan border, and travelled in the company of known Moroccan jihadists, flying from Madrid to Turkey and hooking up with jihad groups there who helped them cross the border into Syria.

Ceuta, with around 80,000 inhabitants, has the highest youth unemployment rate in Europe at 60%. There are also record-breaking educational failure rates. 38.8% do not finish the period of compulsory schooling, but El Príncipe beats even these records.

..."We knew this was going to happen. No one is surprised by it. Young men have already travelled from Ceuta to Afghanistan and Iraq, so why wouldn't they go to Syria now? This problem is not just one of security. There is a very large element of social uprooting and marginality”, according to an official of the intelligence services.

...The mosque of Las Caracolas is controlled by the Unión de Comunidades Islámicas de España (UCIDE), which is represented in Ceuta by Laarbi Mateeis, director of the movement Jamaat Tablighl. ...Thirty of the 32 mosques in the city are controlled by this hardline group which preaches peace but which has occasionally produced terrorists like Mohamed Atta, who directed the suicide attackers of 9/11. All the mosques in Ceuta have Moroccan imams and the majority are paid by the Moroccan Ministry of Religious Affairs.

The island of Lampedusa, the southernmost appendix of Italy in the Mediterranean, has the bad luck of being geographically too close for comfort to the Muslim world. Its history is testament to this.

In 813 AD, despite a 10-year truce signed in 805 by the Emir Ibrahim ibn al-Aghlab with Byzantine Sicily's governor Constantine, the Arabs, who had not kept another previous truce established in 728 and many others since, proceeded to break this one too and, after attacking Sardinia and Corsica, sacked and devastated minor Italian islands including Lampedusa. The rest of Sicily was conquered by Muslim armies later.

After all, as the Encyclopaedia of Islam, considered as the reference work on Islam in the Muslim and non-Muslim academic worlds alike, says:

"The duty of the jihad exists as long as the universal domination of Islam has not been attained. Peace with non-Muslim nations is, therefore, a provisional state of affairs only; the chance of circumstances alone can justify it temporarily. Furthermore there can be no question of genuine peace treaties with these nations; only truces, whose duration ought not, in principle, to exceed ten years, are authorized. But even such truces are precarious, inasmuch as they can, before they expire, be repudiated unilaterally should it appear more profitable for Islam to resume the conflict."

Things have changed since the 9th century, Muslims are not so strong militarily, and invasion and destruction take subtler forms.

Now they come to our shores carrying a white flag and a refugee label, demanding to be housed, fed and that all their needs be met.

This was a pseudo humanitarian crisis, the illegals overwhelmingly were not refugees, they were economic migrants in search of what they probably thought were easy jobs or welfare benefits in Europe. Tunisians should have remained in their country to help rebuild the economy there.

Italy has been justly criticized for mishandling the situation and allowing the illegals to remain and to enter the rest of the EU through temporary visas. To really help the Tunisians, it would have been more useful to ship the illegals back to where they came from, after - if at all possible - establishing who was among them a real asylum seeker in danger of persecution.

Allowing our cities and towns to be flooded with Third World immigrants is as misguided as helping benefit scroungers and giving international aid that is only going to make the receiving countries' local tyrants richer to better oppress and use violence against their people; it is as unwise as giving money to alcoholics and drug addicts to buy their drug of choice.

Charity does not have to be a jerk reaction dictated by misplaced feelings of guilt, it has to be accompanied by a rational evaluation. Not all charity helps its recipients.

Paolo Lo Iudice, the blogger of Vivere in Tunisia about Italians living in Tunisia, says regarding the illegal migrants: "These people are Tunisian but do not love Tunisia. We have stayed here to defend our homes, jobs, projects and people in whom we believe, we love this land although we are not Tunisian. They should be ashamed of themselves, instead of rolling up their sleeves and building a new Tunisia they went to Italy spending 2,000 dinars just to get more money, most of them have all they need here in Tunisia, there is only one thing they lack ...the desire to work".

A year after, the so-called emergency is still not over in Lampedusa, with illegals having continued to arrive this Spring and Summer from Sub-Saharan African countries like Somalia, Eritrea and Ethiopia as well.

The difference now is that the island's reception centre, destroyed by a fire started by the illegals a year ago, does not exist anymore, so the migrants have to be accommodated in hotels and tourist villages which are virtually the place's only economic resources.

In the meantime, the so-called "humanitarian" one-year temporary visas issued in 2011 to tens of thousands North-Africans have expired, but the latter have not been repatriated. Most are thought to be in Italy.

After over a year of this experience rather exceptional even by dhimmi Eurabian standards, there are two interesting aspects of the Lampedusa situation for Europe generally.

The first is that the island's small population size, that renders it easily overwhelmed by groups of immigrants, and its proximity to North Africa make it a good test (in which Lampedusans are the unfortunate guinea pigs) of things to come.

Lampedusa represents a miniature image of what can happen to the rest of Western Europe if both current Muslim immigration and European demographic trends continue, when the proportion of natives and migrants will be the same in Europe as it has recently been in Lampedusa.

The second aspect showing what can lie ahead for the rest of Europe is the reaction of the inhabitants.

Their predicament was illustrated by one of them in this video: "We are really worried about our safety. Even our children were used to walk freely in the streets, and now at 7pm all of us are barricaded in our homes with the doors locked lest something happens to us, because we are seriously afraid."

In a post titled "Defecating on Walls in the Name of Freedom", the Italian political blog Digicontact wrote: "After this first wave of new barbarians the island of Lampedusa counts its damages. Over 60 houses devastated by 'refugees'. They have just arrived and already behave like criminals. What should be the attitude of us Italians facing such behaviour? We got a bit tired of being non-racist at all costs. Faced with such behaviour everybody should be able to understand that this is just the beginning of an invasion and not a simple immigration wave, least of all of refugees, because in Tunisia there is no war. ...Put yourselves in the shoes of those who find their house in Lampedusa destroyed by a group of poor immigrants who escape from hunger by defecating on floors and walls and destroying furniture and whatever they can find".

Confronted with un unprecedented crisis and left to their own devices to deal with it, the people of Lampedusa have used "direct action" methods.

They stopped and delayed by a few hours the Italian Coast Guard patrol boat, loaded with still more "rescued" North Africans, docking at the harbour. Enraged, women later occupied the harbour and docks for several hours and chained themselves, overturning wheelie bins and blocking the road. They then incited fishermen, who with ropes pulled twelve of the many boats on which the migrants had travelled, moored at the docks and obstructing fishing boats (another of the many unresolved problems), to the entrance to the harbour. "Nobody enters here any more", the women shouted from the quay where the flags of Trinacria (ancient name of Sicily) and of the Pelagie Archipelago were flying. To chants of "freedom!" they raised a banner: "We are full".

The island descended into chaos. An urban guerilla, something described by Lampedusa's mayor Dino De Rubeis with the words "We are at war, people have now decided to get justice with their own hands", occurred with violent clashes when hundreds of Tunisians demonstrated in the streets, the police charged them and some of the island's inhabitants protested against the migrants. Dozens of both police and migrants were injured. Three Lampedusans tried to assault the mayor, who was then escorted by the police and barricaded in his office while outside dozens were protesting against him and the Tunisians who wandered around the streets after having burnt down the reception centre where they were staying. In a drawer he kept a baseball bat for self-defence.

The locals vented their fury against journalists and TV crews, attacking them verbally and sometimes physically.

Dozens of Tunisians and Lampedusans threw rocks at each others at a petrol pump, after a group of illegals threatened to explode gas cylinders near the petrol pump in the old harbour, provoking the islanders' reaction.

"Lampedusa Guerilla. Refugees? No, Criminals" is the title of an article that announces: "Italy, invaded, rebels. It is time to say it's enough, everybody go home, whoever comes back must be jailed until he is shipped back. Or else the social revolt about which Antonio Di Pietro talks unthinkingly will be rightfully staged by the inhabitants of Lampedusa and of the other areas of Italy tormented and persecuted by reception centres which are in fact criminal dens".

We saw France's 1998 world cup victory hailed as the triumph of "Blanc, Black, Beur" [White, Black, Arab]. This became the source of endless multicult propaganda. When a French team with almost no ancestral French players in it exited the last World Cup ignominiously, the media failed to reflect on whether this, too, had anything to do with the diversity of the French player's origins. The team went on strike halfway through their matches amid reports of internal disputes involving Muslim players trying to impose halal food on everyone else. It is difficult to conceive of any team fired by any normal sense of patriotism going on strike, refusing to train, halfway through a World Cup. But the media covered up the multicultural aspect of this catastrophe.

It's now clear that many French people no longer support their national team. Because they no longer regard it as their national team. They have had to grow used to "French" players who refuse to sing the country's national anthem at the start of the match. Tonight, as the French and Spanish teams clash in the European Cup, the French nationalist website Fdesouche.com is featuring a video of the Spanish national anthem on its front page and running a poll asking the website visitors whether they support France or Spain. Imagine the BNP asking its website visitors whether they supported England on the day of an important match. This is what diversity does. It destroys the natural sense of community and replace it with an artificial ideal that no one really believes in.

In particular, the Muslim players seem to reject any normal sense of patriotism. It is notably they who refuse to sing the anthem. Even the ancestrally French Franck Ribéry, a Muslim convert who named his son "Sword of Islam", refuses to sing the anthem. This is a recurrent pattern with Muslim players in European football teams. Mesut Ozil, the Muslim Turk who plays for Germany, also refuses to sing the German national anthem. A Muslim was recently expelled from the Serb national team after refusing to sing the country's anthem. As I noted in a previous post, "Nations are not constructed by Islam, but deconstructed".

This from Saint-Denis in Paris. An "Association of the Badly Housed" occupies a government office to demand better accommodation. They are promptly rewarded with the promise of a meeting with a government minister. Looking at their attire, I think we can make a good guess at their religious orientation.

Four Spanish mothers have written a letter denouncing the goings-on at a school in Tarrasa, Catalonia, where, they say, indigenous pupils are routinely harassed by their Muslim classmates and the school authorities always seem to take the side of the aliens.

According to the letter, the nursery school does not meet the legally-mandated minimum of having at least 20% of the class speaking the native language as their mother tongue! Arabic has become the dominant language in the corridors and playgrounds. The school is now sending out official notices in Arabic and Catalan only, not Spanish. In one class, 83.33% of the pupils speak Arabic. There is even a letter in Arabic posted on one of the school doors, in violation of the law.

The outraged mothers also claim that Muslim pupils prevent their own children eating sandwiches if the sandwiches contain ham or other meat derived from pigs. The offending sandwiches will simply be plucked from their hands and thrown in the bin by the Muslims.

The EU should "do its best to undermine" the "homogeneity" of its member states, the UN's special representative for migration has said.

Peter Sutherland told peers the future prosperity of many EU states depended on them becoming multicultural.

He also suggested the UK government's immigration policy had no basis in international law.

He was being quizzed by the Lords EU home affairs sub-committee which is investigating global migration.

Mr Sutherland, who is non-executive chairman of Goldman Sachs International and a former chairman of oil giant BP, heads the Global Forum on Migration and Development, which brings together representatives of 160 nations to share policy ideas.

...He told the committee: "The United States, or Australia and New Zealand, are migrant societies and therefore they accommodate more readily those from other backgrounds than we do ourselves, who still nurse a sense of our homogeneity and difference from others.

"And that's precisely what the European Union, in my view, should be doing its best to undermine."

...Mr Sutherland, who has attended meetings of The Bilderberg Group, a top level international networking organisation often criticised for its alleged secrecy, called on EU states to stop targeting "highly skilled" migrants, arguing that "at the most basic level individuals should have a freedom of choice" about whether to come and study or work in another country.

Mr Sutherland also briefed the peers on plans for the Global Migration and Development Forum's next annual conference in Mauritius in November, adding: "The UK has been very constructively engaged in this whole process from the beginning and very supportive of me personally."

Asked afterwards how much the UK had contributed to the forum's running costs in the six years it had been in existence, he said it was a relatively small sum in the region of "tens of thousands".

Here's more in a similar vein. If Jagland has his way, anti-jihad activists may soon hear a knock at the door. It'll be the gubmint, come to have a "conversation" with you.

Torbjørn Jagland is Chairman of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee -- but most of his work is spent combating radicalism. As Secretary-General of the Council of Europe, Jagland is charged with promoting "greater unity" in Europe. In an interview with Metro, he explained why radicalization is such a dangerous threat.

Why is Europe becoming radicalized?
There are multiple factors at work: the economic crisis, social conditions, unemployment and general dissatisfaction. There's also immigration, which creates a feeling of growing competition in the labor market and growing demand for social benefits. That's why hostility towards immigrants is growing. Then there's another factor: the fear of terrorism. It influences people's attitudes towards Islam because at least in some cases the terrorists claim they're carrying out their attacks in the name of Islam.

Where's the connection between right-wing and Islamist radicalization? Are they expressions of the same attitude, a sense of alienation perhaps? Or is one a result of the other?
We have to be careful because there are many radical tendencies. For instance, our Progress Party here in Norway is not the same thing as the Front National in France. And it's unfair to say that those who express skepticism towards Muslims are in the same box as Anders Behring Breivik. But the sentiments come from the same source -- a feeling that the country is on the defensive. As a result, a growing number of people are defining themselves as against these new influences. They're afraid of being overrun by other cultures.

Politicians are trying to address this problem, if only because it destabilizes society. But can they really solve it, and should they? Isn't radical thinking just an expression of freedom of speech in a democracy?
It's very important to safeguard the freedom of expression. European countries have regulations; for example, it's illegal to post racist messages online. But we can't oppress views that we dislike. But mainstream politicians have to take their responsibility. What worries me a lot is that is that they use the situation irresponsibly, to score political points. Right now mainstream politics is becoming more and more extreme. What we called extreme attitudes 10 years ago is becoming more mainstream. The leaders of major parties need to find a way to express themselves clearly to the voters on matters like integration. Part of the problem is that there's too much exaggeration on issues like integration -- on both sides. Very few people present the facts. One basic fact is that Europe today is totally dependent on immigrants. If all the immigrants disappeared tomorrow, we'd have total chaos. Immigrants are doing many jobs that Europeans normally don't do.

Why should society protect itself against extremism?
The danger is what we've seen in the past: when you make one group a scapegoat for problems in society, soon you'll be killing these people. That's a dynamic that we've seen before, and that's we have to be so cautious. What happened in my own country, with Breivik killing 77 people -- he couldn't have done it without first dehumanizing Muslims and those who support multiculturalism. Dehumanizing ethnic groups is a very dangerous process, because when you reach a certain point you can't stop it.

So we have to erect the barrier that wasn't there in the 1930s Germany?
That's right. Otherwise at some point the development is irreversible and the dark forces take over. That's what happened in Germany.

Whose job is it to erect that barrier?
The media. The education system. NGOs. Political leaders: if they double-speak many of us will do the same.

So politicians are playing with fire by pandering to extremist groups?
Absolutely. It's very difficult to compete with extreme forces because if you use their words, the next day they'll use even stronger words. People don't like to copy -- they want to be original.

Which role does the internet play in promoting radicalization?
Of course the internet plays a very positive role, as we've seen in the Arab Spring and many other situations. But it does have a side effect. People are in essence forming parallel societies in cyberspace. When you're not sitting around a table, discussing with people, but instead just meeting like-minded people on the internet, the discussion becomes more and more extreme. There's nobody who can adjust you. And the people who engage in these parallel societies tend to be lonely people who only meet others on the internet. Many crazy ideas can get into their heads.
Perhaps the root of the problem is loneliness in our modern societies...Several years ago in Norway we had a number of neo-Nazi groups. What we did then was to knock at the members' doors and simply have conversations with them. It went very well and the problem faded away. I think that's something that could be tried elsewhere. And I think this is something that mainstream European parties should pay attention to: many people feel lonely, forgotten, not cared for. But most political parties just speak to the middle class. Then it's much easier for radical parties to appeal to the people who feel left out, just like Marine Le Pen does. And there are many, many such people in Europe today.

This took place last Saturday. The leftists and Muslims start by drowning out the speakers from the anti-Islam party Die Freiheit (Freedom). At first you might think they were just ordinary Germans. Then they start chanting about the "Internationale". Later, they progress to physically harassing and attacking the Freiheit speakers and trying to steal their stuff.

With more women and members of foreign descent than any previous National Assembly, France's newly-elected parliament has moved a step closer to mirroring French society, even as ethnic-minority groups demand more diversity in politics.
By FRANCE 24 (text)

Long a bastion of white male power, France’s National Assembly now counts more women and members of visible minorities than any previous French legislature.

Among the 577 members of parliament elected in the country’s last general election in June,155 (27%) are women while nine belong to ethnic minorities.

By comparison, only 107 seats went to female candidates, and only one to a black candidate in Metropolitan France, in the previous election in 2007.

“We are making progress; parity between men and women has become a prominent issue now,” Réjane Sénac, a sociologist specialised in gender studies at Sciences-Po, told the AFP.

Most of these new lawmakers rode into the National Assembly with the majority Socialist Party and its allies: among the 280 Socialists elected, there are 106 women, including nine among the 18 Greens.

...French citizens of foreign descent have also made inroads into politics, representing eight new members of parliament (nine were elected, but Algerian-born Kader Arif is letting his substitute Emilienne Poumirol step in so that he can retain his position as junior minister for veterans).

Seybah Dagoma, a 34-year-old lawyer of Tchadian descent and founding member of a left-wing think tank, was elected in a Parisian constituency.

Also joining the ranks of Socialist lawmakers are Razzy Hammadi, born of an Algerian father and a Tunisian mother and former president of the Socialists’ youth movement, as well as Malek Boutih, of Algerian origin and former director of the SOS Racisme rights group.

Kheira Bouziane and Chaynesse Khirouni, both Algerian-born, won seats in the east of France, while Corinne Narassiguin, from an overseas French territory, and Pouria Amirshahi, Iranian-born, are among the 11 representatives of French citizens living abroad.

But the French council of black organisations, known by its acronym CRAN, says these eight new ethnically-diverse faces are not enough. It points out that they represent less than 2% of the National Assembly, while 10% of French citizens are foreign-born.

SOCIAL workers want to seize a baby as soon as it is born because they are concerned about the mother’s violent links to the English Defence League.

Durham County Council has told Toni McLeod she would pose a “risk of ­significant harm” to the baby. Social workers fear the child would become radicalised with EDL views and want it put up for adoption immediately.

Mrs McLeod, who is 35 weeks pregnant, is a former leading member of the EDL, in which she was notorious as “English Angel”. The 25-year-old has a string of convictions for violence, including butting and biting a police officer after an EDL march in 2010 and she has been banned from owning dogs after setting a pit bull on a former partner.

However, her cause has been taken up by Lib Dem MP John Hemming who, despite his loathing for the EDL, raised it in the Commons. He contrasts her treatment with that of the extremist Islamic cleric Abu Qatada, who was allowed to remain with his ­children when he was briefly remanded on bail earlier this year as the Government tries to deport him.

The thought police have decided to remove her child because of what she might say
He said: “It raises a curious question as to why Abu Qatada is allowed to radicalise his children but the state won’t take the chance of allowing Toni McLeod to look after her baby in case she says something social workers won’t like.

“I am very strongly opposed to the EDL, which I believe to be a racist organisation, but I do not think we should remove all of the children of the people who go on their demonstrations, however misguided they may be.”

Mrs McLeod has posted racist abuse on social networking sites but denies being racist. She claims she is no longer active with the EDL and has never been charged with violence against children.

Social workers have told her husband Martyn he would be unable to care for his child because he is a full-time soldier just back from Afghanistan.

Mr Hemming, who chairs the Justice For Families campaign group, said yesterday: “This case is one where the ‘thought police’ have decided to remove her baby at birth because of what she might say to the baby. I wonder what the baby’s father is thinking when he fights for a country which won’t allow him to have a child because of what the child’s mother might say.

“Toni now accepts she was wrong to have gone on EDL demonstrations but freedom of speech means nothing if people are not allowed to say things that are thought to be wrong.”

Mrs McLeod wants to move to ­Ireland for the birth to avoid England’s social services. Rifleman McLeod, 31, plans to request a transfer to Northern Ireland so he can be with his child.

Durham County Council told Mrs McLeod on Friday her unborn baby was being placed on its child protection register. Last month, a judge ruled that her three other children, who have different fathers, should be permanently removed from her care.
The Sunday Express is unable to give details of the judge’s explanation for legal reasons.

Documents seen by the Sunday Express reveal social workers are worried about Mrs McLeod’s previous alcohol and drug misuse, her “aggressive behaviour” and her alleged “mental health issues”.

They concede she is no longer involved with the EDL but believe she is now involved with a splinter group, the North West Infidels. The social worker’s report states: “Toni clearly needs to break away from the inappropriate friendships she has through either the EDL or break-off group in order that she can model and display appropriate positive relationships to the baby as he/she grows and develops.

“Toni has been a prominent member of the EDL. They claim they are a peaceful group, however, they have strong associations with violence and racism.”

The father is off fighting jihadists and the government wants to take his children away in case his wife says bad things about jihadists. Meanwhile, it's happy to let actual jihadists raise and indoctrinate their children in the country and even provides them with generous funding to do so. Sometimes you just need to take a step back and think objectively about what is happening.

On this blog I often use the words colonisation and colonist instead of immigration and immigrant. When foreigners arrive in a country alone, or in small groups, and assimilate to the country's norms, the process can be called immigration. When they arrive complete with large extended family groupings, retain their own customs and language, reproduce their own culture in the country of destination while maintaining strong and abiding links with their countries of origin, the process is more properly described as colonisation.

Philippe Meunier. a recently re-elected MP for Sarkozy's UMP party, has issued a statement in which he denounces the colonisation of France.

The national cohesion of the country is ill served by a totally unbridled globalisation which only serves the interests of a minority and more and more districts are struck by immigration that takes on all the appearance of colonisation.

Hinting that his party, the UMP, France's mainstream right-wing political grouping, should seek some form of alliance with the Front National, he criticises his own party for failing to heed the will of the people:

All the UMP's elected officials and members have an obligation to face up to their responsibilities and draw the appropriate conclusions, especially with regard to alliances.

Meunier is a member of the Droite Populaire, an especially right-wing faction within the UMP that has long been regarded as sympathetic to the Front National. Around 20 or so of the Droite Populaire MPs lost their seats a few days ago in the recent elections. This has triggered a debate about whether their approach is unsound or not. Meunier discussed this in an interview

Some voices within the UMP now regret the UMP's drift to the right which led to electoral failure. What do you think?

Nicolas Sarkozy didn't lose because of a drift to the right in his campaign, but because there was no drift to the right in his policy. When he launched his campaign, he was right at the bottom. We needed another couple of weeks of campaigning to win.

The Droite Populaire lost half of its numbers in the elections. Isn't that proof that this line is not a good one?

If there were losses, it's because the Droite populaire MPs are not in safe seats. When you are in a three-way contest against the Front National in the south of France, it's more difficult than being in certain electoral districts in Paris. If you add their scores to those of the FN, you get 60% to 70% of the vote.

...You denounce "a colonisation". That suggests a wave of immigration, but also political control. Where do you see that?

There are different forms of colonisation: colonisation of population, cultural, religious and political. Some elected officials are already under their control. Look at the Palestinian flag which floats at the front of the Vaulx-en-Velin town hall. Go and look at the town centres in certain local authorities where you will see no non-halal commerce. That's one of the reasons I'm not in favour of the right to vote for foreigners.

During the "Arab Spring", the tiny island of Lampedusa, off the coast of Sicily, due to its unfortunate vicinity to North Africa saw the arrival of over 60,000 migrants mostly from Tunisia and Libya in a period of a few months in the early 2011.

We know that the use of words like "invasion" or "flooding" is considered racist by the liberal media, but how else is it possible to describe this situation?

Lampedusa has a total population of just over 6,000 people only when you also include the inhabitants of the nearby island of Linosa, with which it forms Italy's southernmost local council.

Invasion does not need to be military. Any violation of a sovereign country's borders is a crime and an aggression.

There was even an allegation that some women had been thrown overboard by the migrants during the sea crossing from Africa to prevent the overloaded boats from capsizing, according to an eye witness aboard the boats.

The many thousands of immigrants and refugees fleeing the chaos of the "revolution", among whom were suspected escaped prisoners, were then gradually transferred to mainland Italy and other EU countries, but there were repeated times when the number of newcomers was higher than that of locals.

On those occasions when natives were outnumbered, there were tales of local women having to be accompanied everywhere to protect them from immigrants' unwanted attentions, flats' doors forced open, people returning home to find Tunisians sitting at the dining table eating and, after their departures, some householders even discovering faeces inside saucepans, and sacked shops.

The island just became what one newspaper called "a huge immigrant camp".

Maybe expecting to find a hotel reception and with scarcely a thought about the crisis they were creating in the small island, the illegal immigrants were complaining, as in this video, describing what they found in Lampedusa as "shameful" and pontificating "the reception is zero" as if they had been giving a hotel review on TripAdvisor.

The attitude of the Tunisian refugee in the video is particularly enlightening, showing an entitlement mentality according to which Europe, the land of democracy, justice and human rights, was expected, as was its duty, to give all these things to him and his companions, and Italians should have "taken the time" to provide them with all they needed.

This video confirms what Lampedusa mayor Bernardino De Rubeis said: "We have here young Tunisians who arrogantly want everything immediately, just like criminals, ready to endanger our lives and theirs". He later added: "We're in a war, and the people will react. There are people here who want to go out into the streets armed with clubs".

The one expressed in the film is the typical mindset of many Muslim immigrants to Europe. These are the people usually portrayed as "victims" for whom everything else has to be sacrificed.

And when they don't get what they want, there is trouble. In April 2011 the illegals, unhappy about their accommodation conditions, set fire to a guest house where they were staying at the expense of a charity organization, and threw rocks at the police.

On 20 September 2011, similar story: the immigrants torched the reception centre where they were accommodated, destroying three buildings in the holding facility, and clashed with the police, while the media were blaming for the arson everyone, the Italian government, the provisional Tunisian government, the European Union, except the actual perpetrators. This was the second time that the reception centre had been burnt down by refugees, the first during an inmate riot destroying a large part of the complex on 19 February 2009.

The desperate Lampedusa natives, seeing their predicament not understood or helped by Italian or European authorities, in March 2011 even resorted to stopping for an hour the Italian Coast Guard patrol boat, loaded with still more North Africans, from docking at the harbour, and repeated this sort of "direct action" several times.

Lampedusa lives mainly on tourism, and the thousands of migrants, often behaving not exactly as gentlemen, were making the place inhospitable to visitors. In this financial crisis every job is precious. In 2011, the tourist season started in August, two months later than usual.

In addition, the island did not have the agricultural and water resources to deal with the refugee emergency.

And anyway, the crux of the matter is that people should not be forced into that situation through the moral blackmail accusation of not acting charitably.

Unfortunately these are, as Oriana Fallaci said, the enemies we welcome as friends, and their sob stories seem to have the desired effect on many people, in Italy as all over Europe.

Restaurant workers queued to have sex with a teenage girl whose abusers viewed her as ‘a commodity’, a court is told.

Restaurant workers queued to have sex with a teenage girl whose abusers viewed her as “a commodity” to be sold for money as and when they pleased, a court was told yesterday.

She was one of four girls aged from 13 to 17 who are said to have been targeted by two brothers who, the prosecution claim, “variously sexually abused, raped, trafficked, prostituted or tried to prostitute” them between 2008 and 2010.

Ahdel Ali and Mubarek Ali deny 26 child-sex offences linked to the alleged exploitation in Telford, Shropshire, of young teenagers whose troubled backgrounds left them “unable to distinguish between abuse and affection”.

The prosecution claims that lured by the “forbidden fruits” of alcohol, cigarettes and drugs, some of the girls grew “so dependent upon the defendants that it almost became an addiction”.

A jury at Stafford Crown Court was told that one girl was regularly sold for sex to three, four or even five men at a time in various restaurants and above a fish-and-chip shop. She was allegedly rewarded with cannabis or top-ups for her mobile phone.
The court was told that the girl and a young friend, both known to social services, were taken to one restaurant where three men were waiting to have sex with them.

Deborah Gould, for the prosecution, claimed that the friend had said that after Mubarek Ali, 29, spoke to the men in Punjabi, the girls were asked to use stairs at the rear of the premises before climbing through a window. The secrecy was necessary “because they were white girls”.

On another occasion the two girls were allegedly driven to a park in Stoke-on-Trent to meet a man from Bradford called Ajiman and were told to perform sex acts on him.

Miss Gould told the court that the brothers set out to isolate children from members of their own family before asking them to “sort out” their friends as “a favour”.

In 2008 the parents of one 15-year-old girl grew so concerned that they gave police a list of the phone numbers of men who regularly spoke with or sent text messages to their daughter. Her alleged exploitation is said to have continued unabated.

Miss Gould said that the girl had such low self-esteem that being sold for sex, for between £20 and £50 per man, made her feel “important, loved, attractive and valued”. The prosecution claimed that she agreed to have sex in a car with a man in his sixties and was still being told to have sex when she was 14 weeks’ pregnant.

Ahdel Ali, 24, a fast-food delivery driver, is said to have built “a portfolio of girls” to exploit for financial gain. Miss Gould said that he also targeted under-age teenagers for his own sexual gratification. With “casual brutality”, he allegedly raped a 13-year-old girl who thought she was in love with him.

His alleged victim later claimed that she had “wanted to feel that someone cared for her and thought, because he was showing her affection, it was real”.

The court was told that Ahdel Ali once took two girls, aged 12 and 15, for a drive in his car. He allegedly told them they looked “like dirty bitches” and asked for sex.

The elder girl said he told her that he would pay her if she was willing to “have sex with Asian men” but she told him she did not want to be a prostitute.

Marine Le Pen, the leader of the National Front, demanded a recount yesterday after suggesting that vote-rigging had played a part in her failure to become an MP.

Mrs Le Pen was defeated by 118 votes in the Hénin-Beaumont constituency near Calais to cast a shadow over what was otherwise a notable success for her party, which won two seats in the National Assembly.

But she claimed that Communist-run councils in the constituency had deprived her of victory through electoral fraud.

“I’m always suspicious when I’ve got communists on the other side,’ she said after losing to Philippe Kemel, the Socialist candidate.

Outside the headquarters of the far-right Golden Dawn party I watched yesterday as muscular men in black T-shirts waved and cheered as police on motorbikes roared past, giving thumbs-up signs to the neo-Nazis protesters. Elements in the police are alleged to have strong links with the far-Right.

Yesterday there was a demonstration against Islamic radicalism in Brussels, organised by the Parti Populaire. A few dozen "antifascist" activists turned up and were promptly beaten up by the Belgian police as soon as they got off the train. Given the number of Mohammedan attacks on the Brussels police recently, perhaps they've decided to pick the right side at last.

Miss Maréchal-Le Pen, a law undergraduate, came top in her constituency in the southeastern Vaucluse department wtih 49.09 per cent of the vote after a rival Socialist refused to bow out to her mainstream Right rival.

Her grandfather, who founded the anti-immigrant, anti-EU party and turns 84 this week, was by her side last night to toast her victory. His party won 35 seats in 1986 only to lose them all after proportional representation was scrapped. It had only one other since, in 1997, but the result was cancelled shortly afterwards.

"I am happy to the spokeswoman for this French youth that tomorrow will be spearhead new hope in the shape of the National Front," she said from the Provençal town of Carpentras. "6.4 million French voters have already joined us (in presidential elections) and it's just the beginning."

Family celebrations among France's far-Right dynasty were slightly marred however by the fact that Marine Le Pen, Mr Le Pen's daughter and FN leader, lost a bitterly close battle in the constituency of Hénin Beaumont in the northern Pas de Calais. Miss Le Pen lost by just 118 votes to a Socialist, and called for a recount.

Despite her personal defeat, the FN leader described her niece's entrance into parliament as a "huge success" for her party that had "finally smashed a glass ceiling in place for the past 25 years".

"The new make-up of (French) political life is underway. Tonight the UMP is paying for its ideological contradictions and its political compromises.

Her father said he had mixed feelings. "A part of me is rejoicing and another is in pain," he said.

The other far-Right MP was flamboyant lawyer Gilbert Collard in the southern Gard department.

Now that the European football championship is underway, some Germans are proudly flying their country's flag and expressing a healthy sense of national pride.

But this is not to the liking of the deranged left, including the Greens and so-called Antifascist groups. These warped people are going around tearing down German flags wherever they see them, such as private homes or the roofs of cars. Once they have removed the offending object, they often leave little homilies behind.

Please save yourselfthe money, and us the work and nature the garage and don't replace this with a new one.

Whatever your motive was in putting up this flag, in every case it produces nationalism.

Every Sunday now seems to bring a new volley of accusations against Warsi. Yet still her ship sails on - because rules don't apply to Muslims, right?

She personally paid for potential customers, one of whom was in negotiations over a deal with her firm, to attend a Conservative Party lunch with the Prime Minister last month.

...The Sunday Telegraph has also learnt that her business partner, Abid Hussain, a former activist with a radical Islamic group who has a conviction for violence, secured an invitation to meet David Cameron at Downing Street, raising questions over the Prime Minister’s security.

The latest revelations concern the launch of the Conservative Friends of Pakistan, in the Savoy Hotel, central London, last month. The guests of honour were Mr Cameron and Yousuf Raza Gilani, the Pakistani prime minister.

Lady Warsi paid a total of £5,000 for two tables at the event. Guests on one table included her parents, sisters, and others involved in the family’s Dewsbury-based bed manufacturing business.

She “hosted” another table, made up of clients and staff from “Rupert’s Recipes”, although she sat on the VIP table.

The guests’ names were supplied to the Conservative Party by Lady Warsi’s husband, Iftikhar Azam, from his Rupert’s Recipes email address. Rupert’s Recipes describes itself as a “one stop shop for bespoke ingredients” for breaded chicken, fish batter, meat marinades and kebab seasoning.

Who is Rupert, I wonder? Can someone please track down Rupert and ask him how he feels about his recipes being used by a bunch of sick Pakis? Note all the fast-food operators. I wonder if there were any "grooming" specialists in there.

As well as Mr Azam, the table included Mr Hussain, Mohammed Johngir Saddiq, and Fareed Nasir. Mr Nasir is the founder of Chunky Chicken, a chain of 19 fast food restaurants, mainly in the Midlands and North West. He said he was invited to the event by Mr Azam as they were “working closely” about a possible deal.

“We are trying to do some work with Rupert’s Recipes, we are not using their spices at the moment but we have had some samples,” he said. He added that he is not a member of the Conservative Party and has not donated money. Mr Saddiq runs Big John’s, a chain of 15 takeaway shops in and around Birmingham, worth £19.5 million.

His business claims to have been the country’s first “drive thru” fish and chip shop and offers “the nation’s biggest pizza”. He declined to comment on the function.
Other guests included a halal meat supplier, and men believed to be Pakistani restaurateurs.

Lady Warsi personally vouched for the table’s guests, meaning they were exempt from checks carried out by the party’s internal compliance team, which verifies that guests can legitimately make donations to the party.

Source: Telegraph

The Hizb ut-Tahrir business partner and family member has a conviction for violence and got up close and personal with Dave.
here are also questions over Mr Hussain, who met Mr Cameron at a Downing Street reception in November 2010 at which Lady Warsi was also present.

He has been closely involved with the Islamist group Hizb ut Tahrir, which Mr Cameron pledged to ban while in opposition. Mr Hussain, 42, was first involved with the extremists in the early 1990s, and backed them at meetings after the July 7 bombings in 2005. He also has a conviction for an assault, committed when he was 17. His lawyers confirmed that he was convicted of actual bodily harm in 1988 or 1989 and sentenced to three months in a young offenders institution.

They said that the conviction is now “spent” and its disclosure has “no legitimate …public interest”.

However, it would have been relevant to his presence in Downing Street as it raises serious security questions about whether he was fully vetted.

There's more on her corrupt use of office to advance her business interests with the Hizb ut-Tahrir member in the Sunday Times. Note the Sunday Times doesn't even see fit to mention that he is a member of this group.

BARONESS WARSI, the co-chairman of the Conservative party, faces fresh questions over a blurring of her personal interests and her official duties after she promoted a private holiday development during a government trip to Pakistan.

The cabinet minister was photographed alongside a millionaire entrepreneur who is a friend of her business partner, Abid Hussain, as she opened the luxury resort. Her image has since been used on the resort’s website to attract British clients.

Warsi is already being investigated by Sir Alex Allan, the ministerial watchdog, for taking Hussain on an official visit to Pakistan without declaring their joint stake in a Sheffield-based food company.

Warsi opened the holiday complex on July 17, 2010, a month after joining the cabinet. That morning she attended an “outreach” event at the Hilton hotel in Mirpur with Adam Thomson, the British high commissioner.

She told David Cameron earlier this month that Hussain had also been present because he was a member of the Pakistani diaspora who “provided advice and support”.

However, later the same day Warsi took Thomson and other officials at taxpayers’ expense to cut a ceremonial ribbon at the Mirpur Apartments. The complex, which has a pool, gym and mosque, is aimed at British tourists of Pakistani origin.

The apartments are part of the Valley Homes development owned by Zafar Anwar, a Pakistani entrepreneur. Hussain and Anwar are “very close friends”, according to informed sources.

The first entry on an online guest book for Mirpur Apartments has been written by “Mr & Mrs Barrister Abid, London, United Kingdom”. Hussain, of Walthamstow, east London, is commonly known as “Barrister Abid” even though the Bar Council has no record of his qualifying.

The Mirpur Apartments complex is linked to a company in Ilford, east London. On Friday, Abbas Zahoor, a director, initially said it was “a partnership” with Valley Homes and Anwar. Yesterday the resort’s website was taken down.

Hussain denies having a financial interest in Valley Homes or Mirpur Apartments. Anwar did not return calls. A spokesman for Warsi said her attendance at the inauguration was a matter of public record. “She has no business interests in Pakistan,” he said.

The more I reflect on the concept of racism and the bizarre hold it has on our society, the more absurd it seems to me. What’s striking, though, is that the idea has such power that almost everyone defines themselves in terms of it. Groups and people in the Counterjihad movement fall over themselves to emphasise how “non-racist” they are. Some bold dissenters from the establishment line even openly proclaim themselves to be racist.

But it seems to me that anyone who even accepts racist/non-racist as a valid conceptual framework has walked right into the trap that has been set for them. The notion is absurd. For example, let’s say we saw someone going around saying things like, “Look, I’m not a heretic, but I honestly think gays should be allowed to get married...” or something along those lines. What would our reaction be? We’d think, “Wow, not a heretic? Someone has really psyched out this guy.” We would probably surmise that he had been brainwashed as a child in some wacko religious school and now spent the rest of his life tormented by ludicrous notions like “heresy”. And even when he tries to reject the indoctrination, he still defines his new position around the mental pillar of “heresy”. He cannot expunge it from his mind and look at the world with fresh eyes.

Something similar is going on with the idea of racism. Whenever the public discussion turns to Enoch Powell, for example, the theme of whether he was or was not a racist always comes up. As if opposition to the colonisation of your country by alien peoples becomes morally valid or invalid depending on your exact reason for opposing it. And as if there was some set of ethereal scales that could weigh up the ethical purity of a person’s intentions. These are absurd concepts. Rather than accepting this conceptual framework, defining ourselves in terms of it, and opting only for a slightly unorthodox strategic positioning within it, we need to reject it in its entirety.

The absurdity of the notion is, I think, best illustrated with a parable.
Once upon a time there was a society where not everyone was equal. Some were rich and some were poor. The rich ate well while the poor often went hungry. Some even starved to death within sight of the palaces and mansions where the rich people feasted inside. The rich seemed mostly indifferent to the fate of their fellow beings. They felt the privileged position they enjoyed was the result of their own natural superiority over the poor. Although the poor people were much more numerous, the well-armed soldiers of the rich held them in awe. For a while. Eventually, however, the poor people realised that if they all attacked the soldiers at once, they would be irresistible. And so they did. And they were. Victory was theirs. A new era in the history of the world began.

Without their soldiers, the rich were defenceless. In a spirit of revenge, the poor people tore them to shreds. Never again must a small minority be able to lord it over the mass of the people, they said. Never again shall greedism prevail.

Greedism, they said, was the ideology of the now humbled rich. According to this supposed ideology, the quantity and quality of a person’s food should be proportionate to their moral worth. The few rich people left alive were not aware of having had an ideology. It had seemed to them that they were acting on instinct. But no, said the revolutionaries: the vile ideology of greedism dominated your corrupt society, even if you were unaware of it. The purpose of food, said the new paladins of the revolution, was to supply the body’s energy needs, not to give pleasure. For that reason, the state would now provide each citizen with a tasteless vitamin paste to be consumed three times each day. This would satisfy all the body’s requirement for energy. No other food would be allowed.

Those who called for the return of the old, natural-style food were accused of greedism and persecuted as enemies of the state. The revolutionary government turned the education system into an instrument of indoctrination. Children were taught about the evils of greedism. Anti-greedist propaganda pervaded society. “There is no place for greedism in the modern world,” proclaimed the politicians. Public entertainments conveyed approved messages about the perils of greedism. All of history was rewritten, framed as a parable in which malignant ideology of greedism grew and blighted the world, until it was eventually overcome in the Great Revolution.

Very, very rarely, a dissident voice was heard. Someone would argue for the return of natural food. “This vitamin paste is awful. I don’t see the harm in having a nice steak once in a while. It doesn’t mean you’re evil!” These people were ruthlessly persecuted, insulted as greedists, deprived of their livelihoods, expelled from polite society and often imprisoned. With a nod and a wink from the authorities, thuggish vigilante bands would physically attack anyone suspected of greedist tendencies. Occasionally debate would swirl about whether they really were greedists. “I’m not a greedist. I’m just a foodist,” they would insist, desperately. “I honestly don’t see the harm in satisfying the body’s energy needs by eating a pleasant-tasting burger. It doesn’t mean I consider myself superior or want to oppress anyone!”.

This is the kind of absurd position in which we now find ourselves. Most counterjihadists are like people apologetically calling for the return of some natural food but not all: “Only organic stuff, and no sauces, salt or other condiments. Everyone should get the same amount and quality”. Golden Dawn equivalents are like people standing up proudly saying, “Yes, I’m a greedist. If wanting to eat moussaka once in a while means I’m a greedist, then call me a greedist!” Meanwhile the anti-greedist propagandafest rolls on, endorsed by every pillar of the establishment.
But the way out of this madness is to recognise that the concept of greedism, like the equivalent concepts of racism or heresy, is absurd. If we let the Establishment define our conceptual framework for us, its victory is already half won.